Slack / Private Message Drop — page 42

Sorry buddy, I got there first. (actually my real quote was "Yes" - so that would have been shorter... She asked me if I thought the Worobey study was convincing and well-supported - I felt a simply 'yes' was sufficient...) [2020-05-26 19:55:38] [Kristian Andersen] [thread - ID: 2020-05-26 19:55:38] I'm pretty sure Oli is one smug bastard right now :wink: [2020-05-26 21:19:47] [Eddie Holmes] Yes, looking forward to some choice emails on the subject. [2020-05-26 23:45:58] [Andrew Rambaut] [thread - ID: 2020-05-26 19:55:38] Actually Oli is fuming because of all the Trevster adoration about how noble it is to admit you are wrong. [2020-05-27 02:47:18] [Eddie Holmes] The Twitteratti might think that, but the academics won't when they read the paper. It's some take down. [2020-05-27 02:48:11] [Eddie Holmes] Otherwise, we'll need a picture of Trevor playing golf with Trump. [2020-05-27 07:14:43] [Kristian Andersen] I gotta admit, that is really bugging me as well. There are different kinds of mistakes, including honest ones and those you make because unexpected new data is brought to light. Then there are those that are very consequential and made on so little data that the chance of them being wrong is very high. I'm not sure we should applaud those mistakes as they undermine what we're trying to do in the first place (in this case, exactly two high-profile hypotheses were put forward, both of them wrong (one of which was immediately obvious to anyone with basic knowledge in the field)). That's not "science in action", because science is not about making a bunch of random predictions others later have to walk back - science is about trying to get it right in the first shot, and then refine as new data is brought to light. Great preprint btw - I wonder if Trevor would have admitted the mistake if it hadn't come out... [2020-05-27 07:59:44] [Robert Garry] Yes - all true. Hands clapping for the preprint! As for being bugged - I feel the pain. Calling out the bullshit is an unforgiving task. Can even make you a little bit crazy. I should know. Necessary to prevent long-term damage to the field. Still it is possible if you try really hard and are adept at bringing the BS to the public through the press to do more damage than publishing a crap paper in a medical journal - that can be corrected to a certain extent. What's harder to take - because people actually die - is the kind of misinformation we saw in the WA Ebola outbreak where the experts said early on that eating bushmeat was sustaining the Ebola outbreak or this is a normal outbreak and it will be over in 2 weeks. More recently some of the same "experts" said that protecting yourself against C19 was as simple as using a Kleenex to hold onto the rail in the crowed subway car or that this is NOT an airborne virus. That made people selling hand sanitizer very wealthy, but delayed talk of social distancing by about a month in the US. [2020-05-27 15:56:49] [Eddie Holmes] I agree. The other issue here is ego. Cleverly, Trevster does what he does because he is in love with this image in this pandemic: he feels he is saving humanity and has to fuel an adoring public. His threads have been increasing dogmatic and errors will creep in. Ego also explains some of those early events in China: obviously, all those involved are desperately trying to be the first to publish on the virus and prevent others from beating them. This is human nature. It most cases we can handle it. Occasionally, ego and narcissism gets so strong that it is impossible